Mapping of ecosystems and their services

Transcription

1 Mapping of ecosystems and their services in the EU and its Member States Leon C. Braat, Alterra, Wageningen, The Netherlands

2 Ecosystem Services Part 1 Concepts, Models, Studies

3 Ecosystem (Based) (Goods &) Services Ecosystem from Ecology Services from Economics

4 Not all human action is enhancing ecosystems and services Contribution to value (Energy embodied in) human inputs to discover, manage, extract or capture, process and deliver ecosystem service Natural Energy flows Ecosystem Structures / processes to value Combined ecosystem/ ecosystem service flow human service flow Contribution Food=80% Human, 20% Ecosystem Timber = 5% Human, 95% Ecosystem Socio- Economic System Adapted from: Braat & De Groot, 2012

5 THE MAPPING & ASSESSMENT CHALLENGE Management/ Restoration Ecosystems & Biodiversity Institutions & human Judgments determining (the use of) services Feedback between value perception and use of ecosystem services Biophysical 1. MAPPING Structure NATURAL Function* or process CAPITAL & POTENTIAL SERVICES Service 2. MAPPING ACTUAL SERVICES Pollution, destruction Human wellbeing (socio-cultural context) Benefit(s) 3. MAPPING (econ) Value ACTUAL BENEFITS & SOCIAL ECONOMIC VALUES De Groot, R.S., B. Fisher, M. Christie, J. Aronson, L. Braat, R. Haines-Young, J. Gowdy, E. Maltby, A. Neuville, S. Polasky, R. Portela, and I. Ring Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. Chapter 1 (pp 9-40) In: Kumar, P. (Ed), (2010).

6 Exploring the field :

7 Exploring the field :

8 Exploring the field : SPECIAL ISSUE: Mapping Ecosystem Services 2013

9 Exploring the field :

10 Ecosystem Services Part 2 A Mapping Manual

11 Towards a Mapping Manual for EU Member States

12 1

13 2

14 1.0 Scoping study

15 STEP 1.1, 1.2 (3) ORGANISATIE-1 ORGANISATION MODEL DUTCH NEA PROJECT STAS - TK KLANKBORDGROEP BOEGBEELD STUURGROEP BORGEN: VOORTGANGSCONTROLE KWALITEIT COMMUNICATIE BELEID AMBTELIJK + WETENSCHAPP. PROJECTLEIDERS PROJECTGROEP WETENSCHAP PLANBUREAUS PROJECT GROEP = UITVOERDERS + BELEIDSINTERFACE + KWALITEITSCONTROLE N.E.A.-NL VOORSTUDIE 7

16

17 STEP 2.2

18

19 MESEU: ECOSYSTEM TYPES COVERED IN COUNTRY CASE STUDIES AGRO-ECOSYSTEMS FOREST FRESHWATER MARINE OTHER 1.1. U.K. semi-natural grassland, enclosed farmland 1.2. Spain systems with dominant woodly elements, grasslands, monospecies arable, polycultures, industrial agriculture 2.1. Belgium 2.1.a. Flanders 2.1. Belgium 2.1.b. Flanders 2.1. Belgium 2.1.c. Wallonia vegetable farming, cropland, orchard, pastures, natural grassland, field, meadow, annual crop, market garden, horticulture, plant nursery, orchard, meadow, grass patch woodlands Atlantic forest (colino, montano), Mediterranean contental & shrubs short rotation coppice, deciduous forest, coniferous forest, natural deciduous forest, natural pine forest forest, bushes, flower and species-rich shrub deciduous forest, coniferous forest, mixed forest, natural grassland, heathland, shrubland freshwaters, Open waters, wetlands wetlands & lakes, aquifers, rivers & shores marshes, marsh forest, water bodies, water courses still water, watercourse, swamp still water, watercourse, swamp, bog coastal margins, marine coastal, insular, marine waters intertidal flats, beach & dunes coast, estuaries x mountains, moorlands heaths, urban urban, sclerophylous forest & shrub, alpine mountain, mediterranean mountain, arid zone build-up area, park, garden, pioneer vegetation, shrub, heathland, small landscape element urban, military land, recreational park, heath, dunes urban, economic activity land, transport-dedicated land, airport, mine and, wasteland, green urban, sport and leasure areas 2.2. Austria cropland, grassland woodland & forest rivers & lakes x urban, heathland & shrub, sparsely or unvegetated land 3.1. Switzerland Global agricultural areas, pasture, permanent crops forest water bodies, wetland artficial surface, shrubs & herbaceous, open space 3.1. Switzerland dry grassland & pasture, forest & shrub encroachment x x urban areas regional extensive grassland 3.1. Switzerland local x forest x x x 3.2. Balkan Croatia 3.2. Balkan Others 4. The Netherlands x forest freshwater coasts, marine x grasslands, agro-ecosystems forest, rivers, freshwater x scrub, shrub x x x H1110A Sandbanks, H1140A Mud & Sandflats, H1310 Glasswort, H1320 Cord Grass Sward, H1330 Altlantic salt meadows x

20 STEP 2.3

21 STEP 2.3 Ecosystem services represented in the country case studies

22 PROVISIONING SERVICES COVERED IN COUNTRY CASE STUDIES

23 REGULATING SERVICES COVERED IN COUNTRY CASE STUDIES

24 CULTURAL SERVICES COVERED IN COUNTRY CASE STUDIES

25 CROPLAND FOREST LAKES MARINE WATERS Indicators Indicators Indicators Indicators MAES Matrix Section Provisioning Regulation & Maintenance Cultural Division Nutrition Materials Energy Mediation of waste, toxics and other nuisances Mediation of flows Maintenance of physical, chemical, biological conditions Physical and intellectual interactions with biota, ecosystems, and land- /seascapes [env. settings] Spiritual, symbolic and other interactions with biota, ecosystems, and land-/seascapes [env.l settings]

26

27 Egoh, B., Drakou, E.G., Dunbar, M.B., Maes, J., Willemen, L., Indicators for mapping ecosystem services: a review. Report EUR EN. Publications Office of the European Union, Luxembourg. (see Table 1)

28

29

30 Indicators per Ecosystem and Service type used in the Spanish NEA Ecosystems / Service Provisioning Regulating Cultural Total Type Agro-ecosystems Atlantic forest Mediterranean continental forest and shrubs Sclerophylous forest and shrub Alpine mountain Mediterranean mountain Arid zones Wetlands and lakes Aquifers Coastal Insular Rivers and shores Marine Urban

31

32 STEP 3.1 NATIONAL / REGIONAL MAPS Case 4 NL-Marine Case 2.1 Belgium Case 1.1 UK-Wales Case 2.2 Austria Case 3.1 Switzerland Case 1.2 Spain Case 3.2 Balkan

33 STEP 3.1 NATIONAL / REGIONAL ECOSYSTEM MAPS

34 STEP 3.1 EU & National Land use / Land Cover

35 STEP 3.1 National Land Cover Habitats map UK Land Cover Map 2007

36 STEP 3.2 EU Map Cut-Out for Member State

37 STEP 3.3 COLLECT NATIONAL DATA NATIONAL DATA USED FOR REPORTING TO EU USEFULNESS FOR ECOSYSTEM AND ECOSYSTEM SERVICES MAPPING AND ASSESSMENT? Additional information at MS level for habitat types not available Most countries do not yet have a well developed system for using indicator species to asses ecosystem health Use of indicator species to determine ecosystem state using information from EU reporting requires RESEARCH ON RELATIONSHIPS SPECIES, FUNCTIONAL TRAITS, SERVICES

38 STEP 3.4 COLLECT SCIENCE REPORTS MAPPING

39

40 4.1 MAPPING Ecosystems / Natural Capital

41 4.1 MAPPING Ecosystems / Natural Capital

42 4.1 MAPPING Ecosystems / Natural Capital

43 4.1 MAPPING Ecosystems / Natural Capital A. DIRECT MAPPING the process of developing maps from remote sensing (RS) images and aerial photography. B. INDIRECT MAPPING the process of transforming (field) data into maps.

44 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services Provisioning services Food FLOW INDICATOR Inferred from Agri Stat DATA

45 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services Regulating services Climate regulation

46 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services Carbon storage capacity (RE)(Region in Austria

47 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services ASSESSMENT METHOD: 1. expert judgement land cover types 4 classes : 1. high carbon storage capacity (forest), 2. mean (orchard), 3. low (crop land), 4. no potential (sealed soils). 2. data on proportion of humus The two indicators combined with a rule based decision matrix. resulting values ranges from 0 to 5.

48 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services Cultural services

49 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services Recreational opportunity spectrum Data: Naturalness Protected areas (Natura 2000) Presence to water and water quality (swimming water) Accessibility Population

50 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services ACTUAL RECREATIONAL USE Maes et al. 2012

51 4.2 MAPPING Ecosystem Services -precision and accuracy of the assessment depend on the goal of the study -Austria seems to offer an interesting compromise: simplicity of the experts judgment approach while relying on a clear list of indicators, some of them being quantitative.

52

53 Ecosystem Services Part 3 VALUATION & MAPPING VALUES

54 THE MAPPING & ASSESSMENT CHALLENGE Management/ Restoration Ecosystems & Biodiversity Institutions & human Judgments determining (the use of) services Feedback between value perception and use of ecosystem services Biophysical Structure or process Function* Service Human wellbeing (socio-cultural context) 3. MAPPING Benefit(s) ACTUAL BENEFITS & SOCIAL (econ) Value ECONOMIC VALUES Pollution, destruction De Groot, R.S., B. Fisher, M. Christie, J. Aronson, L. Braat, R. Haines-Young, J. Gowdy, E. Maltby, A. Neuville, S. Polasky, R. Portela, and I. Ring Integrating the ecological and economic dimensions in biodiversity and ecosystem service valuation. Chapter 1 (pp 9-40) In: Kumar, P. (Ed), (2010).

55 WHY MAPPING VALUES? OPTIMAL SPATIAL ALLOCATION & MAXIMUM SUSTAINABLE SOCIAL BENEFITS OF NATURAL CAPITAL

56 MAPPED VALUE of TIMBER 3. MAPPING ACTUAL BENEFITS & SOCIAL ECONOMIC VALUES X ha * Y m3/ha * Z /m3 = VALUE! CASE STUDY : NATIONAL PARK HOGE VELUWE (Hein, 2011) The annual amount of wood: 2600 m3 of saw wood, 1200 m3 of medium quality, 8000 m3 of low quality wood High quality wood = 90/m3, medium quality = 40/m3, Low quality wood = 9/m3. The total value of the service: 2600* * *9 = 354,000/year.

57 Mapped Value of Recreation Service 3. MAPPING ACTUAL BENEFITS & SOCIAL ECONOMIC VALUES Maes et al. 2012

58 Ecosystem Services Part 4 Lessons learned

59 Potential benefits of ES maps (for planning and decision support ; Hauck et al, 2012) Identifying and framing problems Conflicts and synergies between ecosystem services Indicate threats Identifying suitable policy measures, Improving the targeting of measures Demonstrating or evaluating the benefits of policy measures in relation to their costs Use as a communication tool

60 Potential Risks (Hauck et al, 2012) Identifying problematic areas on a map can result in regions being stigmatised. Indicate areas where exploitation can be increased Scale of ecosystem services maps and the scale of decision making not identical. Resolution: detailed maps are needed for legal consistency especially at the regional and local level. Mapping MONEY values suggests NC / ES are FOR SALE!

61 Ecosystem Services The End